Date
Publisher
arXiv
We present Team BD's submission to the BEA 2025 Shared Task on Pedagogical
Ability Assessment of AI-powered Tutors, under Track 1 (Mistake Identification)
and Track 2 (Mistake Location). Both tracks involve three-class classification
of tutor responses in educational dialogues - determining if a tutor correctly
recognizes a student's mistake (Track 1) and whether the tutor pinpoints the
mistake's location (Track 2). Our system is built on MPNet, a Transformer-based
language model that combines BERT and XLNet's pre-training advantages. We
fine-tuned MPNet on the task data using a class-weighted cross-entropy loss to
handle class imbalance, and leveraged grouped cross-validation (10 folds) to
maximize the use of limited data while avoiding dialogue overlap between
training and validation. We then performed a hard-voting ensemble of the best
models from each fold, which improves robustness and generalization by
combining multiple classifiers. Our approach achieved strong results on both
tracks, with exact-match macro-F1 scores of approximately 0.7110 for Mistake
Identification and 0.5543 for Mistake Location on the official test set. We
include comprehensive analysis of our system's performance, including confusion
matrices and t-SNE visualizations to interpret classifier behavior, as well as
a taxonomy of common errors with examples. We hope our ensemble-based approach
and findings provide useful insights for designing reliable tutor response
evaluation systems in educational dialogue settings.
Study at a glance
- Question: How accurately can an AI system determine whether an AI tutor correctly identifies and locates a student's mistake?
- Setting and data: Educational dialogues from the BEA 2025 Shared Task competition.
- Method: Tests an ensemble of language models to classify AI tutor responses (grouped cross-validation and hard-voting ensemble).
Why it matters
Assessing the pedagogical ability of AI-powered tutors involves determining whether a tutor correctly recognizes a student's mistake and pinpoints its location. These measures provide insights for designing reliable tutor response evaluation systems in educational dialogue settings.
Key findings
- In educational dialogues, an automated system successfully determined whether an AI tutor correctly recognized a student's mistake.
- The system evaluated whether an AI tutor recognized a mistake more accurately than whether the tutor pinpointed the mistake's location.
- Combining multiple language models improved the robustness and generalization of evaluations of AI tutor responses.
Summary drafted with AI from the paper’s abstract and may contain errors. See the full paper for details.
What is the application?
Who age?
Why use AI?
Study design
